채무부존재확인
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The following facts may be found in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 7 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 1 (including each number), and the purport of all pleadings:
The plaintiff is a stock company running the insurance business, and the defendant is the mother of the network B (the name was C at the time of entering into the insurance contract, but the name was changed thereafter; hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") that entered into the insurance contract with the plaintiff as follows:
B. On August 14, 2006, the Deceased entered into an insurance contract in the separate sheet where the deceased suffered injuries during the period of insurance up to August 14, 2006 due to sudden and remote accidents and died within two years from the date of the accident as a result of its direct result, the deceased’s legal heir, who is a beneficiary, was entitled to receive KRW 40 million from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). At that time, the Plaintiff paid the first insurance premium of the instant insurance contract to the Plaintiff.
C. On May 16, 2014, the Deceased discovered that he/she was dead (hereinafter “instant accident”) after sticking a large amount of riglass injection on his/her left arms at his/her residence located in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon.
On the other hand, the defendant inherited the deceased.
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the accident of this case occurred due to the deceased's intentional suicide, because the deceased had been treated as a friendly certificate before the accident of this case, or had been tried to commit suicide several times, and it is reasonable to view that the accident of this case occurred due to the deceased's intentional suicide. The accident of this case constitutes a reason for exemption from the payment of insurance money under the insurance terms and conditions, and therefore, the plaintiff's obligation to pay insurance money to the defendant does not exist.
B. First of all, considering the purport of Gap evidence No. 6 and the entire argument, the insured’s intent or intent under the terms and conditions of the insurance contract of this case.